No, it doesn't. It just makes you better prepared next time to want to make a similar point.

Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.

Societies fail because their governments fail them. Over time power shifts more and more away from society to a few elites in government who can't possibly design what emerges naturally from society in the form of social traditions and institutions.

The question is, what comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do we get bad government, which has been building for a long time in the U.S. because of the decay of the people, or do bad governments create some sort of a negative feedback that degrades the people, who elect progressively worse governments, that degrade the people. . .

...ok, nothing negative about how civilized societies devolve, only about my terminology...noted...

Kabuki Joe

Like it or not, sexual taboos are largely cultural.

Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.

The question is, what comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do we get bad government, which has been building for a long time in the U.S. because of the decay of the people, or do bad governments create some sort of a negative feedback that degrades the people, who elect progressively worse governments, that degrade the people. . .

Good question. On my view, people cannot be moral if they are not first free.

Yes but are they free because they are moral and gradually become less free as they become less moral?

Note that I am using the broad idea of "moral" as opposed to primarily the religious ideal. For example, I would say that moral people require self reliance and personal responsibility of themselves. Yet I've watched over my lifetime as both of these values have been eroded greatly in America. Do we have these governments because of that erosion or do we have these governments as a result of that erosion?

Yes but are they free because they are moral and gradually become less free as they become less moral?

Note that I am using the broad idea of "moral" as opposed to primarily the religious ideal. For example, I would say that moral people require self reliance and personal responsibility of themselves. Yet I've watched over my lifetime as both of these values have been eroded greatly in America. Do we have these governments because of that erosion or do we have these governments as a result of that erosion?

I think it is the latter.

Yes, the more general meaning of moral. I just think that in order to be moral you have to be free to make choices.

The Renegade History of the United States documents how under British rule the colonists became largely irreligious and immoral, but given their freedom turned to both.

In truth, they probably go hand-in-hand, society and state, an on-going feedback loop like from a guitar that blows the amp.